Jump to content

Wikipedia:Sockpuppet investigations/Tombah/Archive

Add links
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia


Tombah

Tombah (talk+ · tag · contribs · deleted contribs · logs · filter log · block user · spi block · block log · CA · CheckUser(log) · investigate · cuwiki)

18 July 2022

[edit]

Suspected sockpuppets

[edit]

The probability of the following event being a coincidence is vanishingly small. Within four hours of the closure of a seven-week long RM discussion:

  • two commenters ignored the “do not modify” ([1] and [2]) and a third commenter made a similarly formatted edit as a "post-close comment" ([3])
  • for two of the three accounts, this was the only RM they have ever commented on
  • all these votes were similar in nature
  • all three have timecards suggestive of the Israel timezone[4][5][6]
  • All three editors are either new (Tombah’s editing began just over 6 months ago) or low edit count (both Eladkarmel and Atbannett have just over 500 edits - i.e. the ARBPIA threshold)
  • All three editors interacted with each other on ARBPIA pages immediately after the two low edit count accounts passed the 500 edit threshold: March 2022: Eladkarmel supported Tombah in discussions on another ARBPIA page at [7]; April 2022: Eladkarmel supported Tombah in discussions on another ARBPIA page at [8], around the same time as Atbannett was involved in a edit war on the same page[9][10]

For a seven-week-long RM to attract this kind of behavior (modifying a closed discussion after it has closed when the article tag has gone), in just four hours after it has closed, is too much of a coincidence.

It is also worth noting that Tombah has interacted with a sock of יניב הורון (a persistent offender) as discussed at Wikipedia:Sockpuppet_investigations/יניב_הורון/Archive#28_April_2022. The two edits in question[11][12] are really very odd - a totally new editor (<10 edits), later found to be an experienced sock, comes out of nowhere to Tombah's talk page asking for him to edit some ARBPIA content. How did this editor know to come to Tombah? Why did this editor need to come to Tombah if the editor was in fact a sock of יניב_הורון? Bizarre.

Onceinawhile (talk) 20:13, 18 July 2022 (UTC)[reply]

@RoySmith: thanks for this. Your instinct is probably right. It is probably not sockpuppetry - I have looked into it further and now seen that Eladkarmel and Atbannett are highly experienced editors on Hebrew wikipedia. I checked the talk pages there and there was no on-wiki discussion of this on Hebrew wikipedia either. But the timing here cannot be entirely coincidental. Another couple of out-of-the-blue examples from May 2022:
Is this something I could / should raise at another forum?
Onceinawhile (talk) 00:41, 19 July 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Thank you for the diffs, but to be honest, they really just look like multiple editors who share the same point of view. Which on a topic like this, isn't surprising. I also see a few patterns in how the various accounts write edit summaries which lead me to believe they're not the same person. So, if I don't think they're socks, and you think "It is probably not sockpuppetry", I don't what issue would you be raising on another forum. I'm going to close this. -- RoySmith (talk) 01:02, 19 July 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Comments by other users

[edit]

Accused parties may also comment/discuss in this section below. See Defending yourself against claims.

Clerk, CheckUser, and/or patrolling admin comments

[edit]
  •  Additional information needed - I'm seeing three editors (who have been around for 1, 7, and 16 years) who share an interest in a topic which engenders passion in many people. That three editors who edit on Jewish topics should have timecards suggesting they live in Israel is totally unremarkable. As for the late comments on the RM discussion, that sounds like off-wiki canvassing, which is not wonderful, but also not indication of socking. I'll leave this open for now, to provide a chance to offer better evidence, but for now, I don't see anything which justifies further action. -- RoySmith (talk) 21:44, 18 July 2022 (UTC)[reply]
  • Closing per my comments above. -- RoySmith (talk) 01:03, 19 July 2022 (UTC)[reply]

08 February 2024

[edit]

Suspected sockpuppets

[edit]

Since becoming extended confirmed, has focused on the same articles as Tombah, and has also used the same obscure offline only Hebrew source (Rajoub570, again, Tombah). The editor interactions show a substantial overlap for an editor who has a total of 579 edits, with the editing all focused on the same topic Tombah had been focused on, the supposed origins of Palestinian Arabs in a number of villages. Both Tombah and Rajoub570 have edits on the Arabic Wikipedia, (Tombah vs Rajoub570, so I dont find the editing in Arabic by Rajoub570 to be expulatory. Similar editing times from xtools (R, T) nableezy - 17:34, 8 February 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Comments by other users

[edit]
Accused parties may also comment/discuss in this section below. See Defending yourself against claims.

Thank you, @nableezy. This is such a widespread problem on Wikipedia that the Israel-Palestine WP:CTOP seems to me that it will require protection beyond simple EC protection. IOHANNVSVERVS (talk) 14:30, 9 February 2024 (UTC)[reply]

I can't speak on Rajoub570 but I was suspicious of ManOnTheMoon92 being a partisan, pro-Israel editor. IOHANNVSVERVS (talk) 14:32, 9 February 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Clerk, CheckUser, and/or patrolling admin comments

[edit]

16 April 2024

[edit]

Suspected sockpuppets

[edit]

The editor shows some similarities to Tombah.

  • Article overlaps
    • Owenglyndur vs Tombah
    • Owenglyndur vs Hyrcanus (confirmed Tombah sock). The overlap is only a couple of articles, but they are pretty obscure with low activity and with little to no edits between Owenglyndur's and Hyrcanus' edits.
  • Use of NOTNEWS to remove incidents involving the death or injury of Palestinians.

My credence in it being a Tombah sock is somewhat diminished by them having even more article overlaps with Gilabrand.[17] and their contributions to Commons, which resemble Gilabrand's activities more than Tombah. Sean.hoyland (talk) 14:55, 16 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]

I looked at the content and style of their edits in English and Hebrew as well as at the photos they uploaded and you can clearly see that this is not even similar to Tombah.
And based on the topics they are dealing with, it seems unlikely to me that it is Gilabrand either.
It seems illogical to me that every time there is a new Israeli editor who is interested in archeology and Jewish history, they are immediately considered sockpuppets of Tombah.Eladkarmel (talk) 08:58, 1 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Thanks Eladkarmel, I appreciate you taking some time to look at it. I have fairly low credence in a match too, hence the word "some" in the report. I can't comment on the accuracy of a statement like "every time there is a new Israeli editor who is interested in archeology and Jewish history, they are immediately considered sockpuppets of Tombah". I don't think I was around when Tombah was active, I'm not very familiar with them and I think this is the first time I've filled an SPI that includes them. As for illogical, pattern matching is difficult and unreliable. I wish we could solve the extensive sock problem using logic. Sean.hoyland (talk) 09:14, 1 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]
I should add that Israeli editors who are interested in archeology and Jewish history are essentially invisible/of no interest to me. Editors who remove incidents involving the death or injury of Palestinians or revert Huldra are visible to me. Sean.hoyland (talk) 09:23, 1 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Just so you can understand what caught my attention, when I just started editing on the English Wikipedia, I was also told I was a sock puppet of Tombah (luckily I have been very active for 12 years on the Hebrew Wikipedia, and that's what saved me). I also saw other similar accusations that seemed very unlikely to me.Eladkarmel (talk) 11:09, 1 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]
I notice that you are not explicitly denying that you are a sock of Tombah. Obviously, this is highly suspicious. Yes, I agree people can be a bit over-enthusiastic in sock-hunting, including me. I guess we are still hunters at heart. Sean.hoyland (talk) 11:14, 1 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]
When they opened the discussion about it, I was not aware of the discussion. I think that before starting such a discussion it is worth checking in depth. (Anyone who opens my edits in Hebrew, and the truth is also in English, understands that I am not him) Eladkarmel (talk) 12:37, 1 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Unfortunately even with depth, and I'm a fan of depth, we often see the patterns we want to see. My SPI here is an example of that, which is why I am quite happy to undermine the case by pointing at data in Commons that does not fit the theory. Tools like the Editor Interaction Analyser automate selection bias. Every SPI case leaves out all of the data that does not fit the neat theory of the case. I would rather there were a lot more checkusers and all editors were routinely checked. It's such a fundamental problem in a rules based system like Wikipedia, to have 2 classes of editors, one that has to follow the rules or lose their editing privileges and the other that does not have to worry about that because they can regenerate themselves. Sean.hoyland (talk) 13:39, 1 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Comments by other users

[edit]
Accused parties may also comment/discuss in this section below. See Defending yourself against claims.
  • I really recommend looking at their edits on the Hebrew Wikipedia. I don't have tools to check IP, but all three are active on the Hebrew Wikipedia - and I can say with almost certainty that it is not the same person. I say it again - not every Israeli editor is tombah. Eladkarmel (talk) 19:06, 25 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Clerk, CheckUser, and/or patrolling admin comments

[edit]
Retrieved from "https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Wikipedia:Sockpuppet_investigations/Tombah/Archive&oldid=1228121333"